The "Vast Wasteland" Gets Vaster: The Future of Television in the Online Revolution

In 1961, nearly a decade after the “Golden Age” of television had passed, commercial television was still changing the American lifestyle, from living rooms to bars. It was then that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Newton Minow declared that television was a “vast wasteland” (Vivian 224).

Though Minow would probably maintain his statement in light of the Nielsen ratings for “Dancing With the Stars” or “American Idol,” his moral accusations appear disregarded by his own constituency. Not only did this “wasteland” continue to prosper in bars and living rooms, but it expanded into ever greater frontiers with the development of new technology. Current reports already reveal that the future of TV will not always appear, at least exclusively, on TV. In an already interwoven and interconnected field, television is becoming even more integrated with other communication fields and media as new technology rapidly changes both form and function. It is becoming increasingly apparent to the modern viewer that the future of television will rely heavily on its integration with online communication.

In 1927, Philo T. Farnsworth invented a tube that would capture and transmit moving images—hence television is often colloquially referred to as “the tube” (Vivian 221). The groundbreaking discovery was demonstrated by RCA in 1939’s World Fair, and within two years the FCC licensed the first station in the United States (Vivian 221). In 1954, color television was in effect, and by 1960, 87% of U.S. homeowners had a box (Fitzpatrick). In 1980, cable television launched a second era in television history, which consisted of copper wires packed into coaxial cables that would transmit hundreds of channels into one’s living room (Moyer). Today, there are TV sets in over 110 million American households (Fitzpatrick).

The interconnected media involved in this portion of the world of communication are vast. In fact, even television itself can be seen as the furthering of another industry: radio. Radio shows in the 1930’s and 1940’s were often initially just audio versions of what would soon become televised programs—and in the 1950’s, TV networks drew audiences as well as advertisers from the radio (Vivian 185). Advertising remains one of the key communication specialties related to the field of TV. Advertising is vital in order for networks to receive revenue, taking the form of commercial breaks or product placement in its programming. Public relations keep television functioning by allowing the network organizations to relay messages to their viewers. TV’s entertainers and stars also use PR firms to maintain their public images or to utilize crisis control in times of need. Journalism has been involved in television history since its origins; critics in newspapers and magazines (and now on blogs) have often consistently made or break shows based on their reviews, and further publicize television shows to the masses. Film, of course, has always coincided at times with TV; their professionals (from writers to producers to actors) often overlap. Furthermore, those two mediums themselves often crossover in various ways, whether it is the cinematic approach utilized by The Sopranos or the several films that are born from Saturday Night Live sketches. Thus, journalists, advertisers, public relations specialists, filmmakers, and all the jobs associated with TV (writers, producers, directors, actors, consultants, music coordinators—one can simply watch the end credits of a random series) are all connected to this specialized industry.

The landscape, however, is changing. The interconnection of media and communication professionals with regard to television is not-so-slowly becoming even more interwoven. With the emergence of sites like Hulu.com,VideoSurf.com, Boxee.com, Netflix’s “Watch Instantly,” or Amazon.com’s Digital Library, a growing number of web-based services “help to exploit the power of Internet-based entertainment” (Moyer). This emergence—or the “Internet invasion”—is often being referred to as the “third era of television” (Moyer). The invasion and era are frightening to copyright holders, movie studios, and over-the-air broadcasters who fear a fate similar to that of the newspaper industry (Moyer).

While some sects of the industry fret the digital threat, it should be noted that the industry is expanding in this very process. The new media marriage between the internet and TV inherently merges all the communication professionals of the world wide web into the aforementioned mix of media specialists. The marriage is best explained by the term IPTV, which stands for Internet Protocol TV, as it “transforms video content…into digital files and makes TV a two-way experience that lets viewers chat on their screens or use their phones to program their DVRs remotely” (Mehta). Now even phone companies have a stake in the television industry. Moreover, the role of the advertiser is shifting as well—and, perhaps surprisingly, in a positive way for that portion of the world of communication. The new technology of IPTV has the capability to relay targeted advertisements to the consumer based on his or her viewing habits and preferences on the computer (Mehta). It is therefore predicted, as marketing Professor at the University of California at Berkely Peter Sealy tells Fortune, that IPTV is “going to open up the opportunity for more dialogue between the marketer and the consumer” (Mehta). The digital revolution of the 21^st century has thus been deemed a “godsend,” according to Professor Sealy, for the marketing world (Mehta).

The fusion of communication fields and professionals does not cease there. DirecTV’s satellite-direct programming in 1994 was pivotal in altering the playing field of communication, as satellite companies were put into the picture (Vivian 221). Apple’s creation of the video iPod in 2005 invited the participation of the mobile phone industry, leading to mobisodes—or mini-episodes for mobile television (Vivian 225). This resulted in a diversion (time and space shifts) from the traditional way in which “people adapt[ed] their daily routines to television’s scheduling” into a new relationship wherein “people are watching television when it suits them” (Vivian 225). While New Television—a term that encompasses cable, satellite, handheld, and internet delivery technology—might concern some insiders, it is undeniably “audience empowerment” for those on the receiving end of communication (Vivian 225).

The most recent Writer’s Strike was a historical moment that serves as proof of New Media’s vitality and controversy regarding television and communication. The strike lasted from November 2007 to February 2008 with over 12,000 writers joining in the fight (Cieply). Although there were a variety of issues and factors, ranging from DVD residuals to animation and reality shows, according to The New York Times, the conflict was “not so much a tiff over industry economics as a struggle for power over Hollywood’s perceived digital future” (Cieply). In late November, the strike entered a phase wherein the Writers Guild of America West and the Writers Guild of America East were protesting over a new proposal from the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (Cieply). In the proposal, called the New Economic Partnership, writers were offered revised terms for using movies and television shows on the internet but the terms were evidently not revised enough; the guild was still unsatisfied in their demands for new media compensation (Cieply).

The studio side of the argument was less publicly respected but nevertheless very notable in a discussion of new media and the industry. The Times reports, via anonymous “senior” sources, studio and network executives were fighting against potential union pay structures that could prevent their companies from “operating effectively in a rowdy Internet world that has already badly damaged the music and news industries” (Cieply). It was as if the company executives and writers were in an ideological argument over the future of the media or how fast that future was coming, or that companies were scared of that future, or simply that the companies wanted more money. Many will recall seeing signs amongst the publicized protests, some of which read: “The Future Will Not Be Televised…It Will Be Downloaded.” All evidence and trends would suggest this, albeit satirical, charge to be accurate, but there are ways—which involve media convergence and intertwining communication fields and professions—that this does not need to frighten traditional network executives.